2007-26664 ResoRESOLUTION NO. 2007-26664
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE EVALUATION
AND APPRAISAL REPORT (EAR) OF THE MIAMI BEACH
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE
CITY ADMINISTRATION TO TRANSMIT THE REPORT TO THE STATE
OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND TO ALL
OTHER REQUIRED STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL REVIEW
AGENCIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 163.3191, F.S.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 163.3191(1), Florida Statutes, local
governments are required to prepare and adopt an Evaluation and Appraisal Report
(EAR) as one component of the local planning process; and,
WHEREAS, an Evaluation and Appraisal Report has been prepared as required
by State Law and has recommended EAR-based text amendments to the City's
Comprehensive Plan as a result of this EAR; and
WHEREAS, at its November 23, 2004 meeting, the Planning Board of the City of
Miami Beach considered the draft EAR and adopted a resolution recommending the
transmittal of the document to the South Florida Regional Planning Council for review;
and
WHEREAS, at its December 8, 2004 meeting, the City Commission approved
the transmittal of the EAR for review; and
WHEREAS, the South Florida Regional Planning Council, as well as the Florida
Department of Community Affairs reviewed the EAR and provided an Advisory Report
and Preliminary Sufficient Review respectively, finding the EAR not sufficient for
adoption; and
WHEREAS, the City Administration has addressed the comments and objections
in both reports and recommends that the Evaluation and Appraisal Report be adopted by
the City Commission; and
WHEREAS, at its July 24, 2007 meeting, the Planning Board recommended that
the Evaluation and Appraisal Report be adopted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED. BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that
The Evaluation and Appraisal Report of the City of Miami Beach
Comprehensive Plan is hereby adopted;
2. The City Administration is authorized and directed to transmit the adopted
Evaluation and Appraisal Report of the City's Comprehensive Plan as
approved by the City Commission to the Florida Department of
Community Affairs, the South Florida Regional Planning Council and to all
other required State and local governmental agencies in accordance with
Section 163.3191, F.S.
3. This Resolution shall become
PASSED and ADOPTED this 26th day of
~',~
,N,~-r
C 3
T ST:
CITY CLERK Ytob~rt Parcher
temb~~ / /- I / .2007.
its passage.
David Dermer MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO
FORM AND LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
City rn y
9~~7-~/07
Date
F:\PLAN\$PLB\Comp Plan Amendments\2005 EAR\Reso adopting EAR.doc
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution adopting the Evaluation And Appraisal Report (EAR) Of The Miami Beach Comprehensive
Plan in Accordance With Section 163.3191, F.S.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Regulatory. Required by State Statutes
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): Regulatory
Issue:
Should the City Commission adopt the Evaluation and Appraisal Report of the City's Comprehensive Plan
Item Summa /Recommendation:
SECOND READING PUBLIC HEARING
The Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) is astate-mandated evaluation and appraisal of the City's
Comprehensive Plan (Section 163.3191, F.S). Required every seven years, the EAR is intended to bean
assessment of how well the Plan is working, and to provide an opportunity to revise the Plan to address
changing issues and conditions. In order to be effective, the Plan. must be a living document, one with the
flexibility to adapt to changing conditions and needs. Although there are other opportunities to periodically
revise the Plan, these revisions often occur as the result of outside development applications.
The Administration recommends that the City Commission approve the proposed resolution adopting the
Evaluation and A raisal Re ort of the Ci 's Com rehensive Plan.
advisory Board Recommendation:
At the July 24, 2007 meeting, the Planning Board voted unanimously to recommend adoption of the
Evaluation and Appraisal Report of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
On May 29, 2007, the Administration wrote a Letter to Commission providing preliminary information on
the process for this Comprehensive Plan Amendment and a tentative schedule for the adoption of this
element.
Financial Information:
Source of Amount Account
Funds: ~
2
3
OBPI Total
Financial Impact Summary:
The ro osed Ordinance is not ex ected to have an fiscal im act.
Ci Clerk's Office Le islative Trackin
Jorge Gomez or Mercy Lamazares
[~epartmen~irector ~ ~ A~si Jstant City Manager ~ ~ City Manager
lar\EAR
M I A! Y 1 I B EAC H AGENDADA E a~'V
m MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor David Dermer and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: September 26, 2007
Second Reading Public Hearing
SUBJECT: Evaluation and Appraisal Report of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL
REPORT (EAR) OF THE MIAMI BEACH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND
AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY ADMINISTRATION TO TRANSMIT
THE REPORT TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
AFFAIRS AND TO ALL OTHER REQUIRED STATE AND LOCAL
GOVERNMENTAL REVIEW AGENCIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION
163.3191, F.S.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission approve the proposed resolution
and adopt the Evaluation and Appraisal Report of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
BACKGROUND
The Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) is astate-mandated evaluation and update of
the Plan (Section 163.3191, F.S). Required every seven years, the EAR is intended to be
an assessment of how well the Plan is working, and to provide an opportunity to revise the
Plan to address changing issues and conditions. In order to be effective, the Plan must be a
living document, one with the flexibility to adapt to changing conditions and needs.
Although there are other opportunities to periodically revise the Plan, these revisions often
occur as the result of outside development applications.
The City initiated its EAR process with an extensive community involvement effort that
occurred between March and May 2004. During this time the Project Team conducted
numerous meetings that included a series of one-on-one meetings with key City staff and
elected officials; an interagency scoping meeting with adjacent local governments, and
County, regional and state agencies; several advertised public workshops with City
residents, and workshops with the Planning Board and the City Commission. The process is
also detailed in the Public Participation Summary section of the report.
On December 8, 2004, the City Commission approved the transmittal of the EAR to the
South Florida Regional Planning Council (SFRPC). On February 22, 2005, the Department
of Community Affairs (DCA) issued its Preliminary Sufficiency Review, finding the EAR not
sufficient and provided comments on those areas that needed further information. The
City Commission Memorandum
Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR)
September 26, 2007 Page 2
South Florida Regional Planning Council provided its Advisory Report on March 5, 2005,
advising that the City's EAR was not sufficient for adoption and recommended that the City
address issues detailed in its report.
This revised report addresses the comments from DCA and the SFRPC. The EAR was
presented for a second time to the City's Planning Board on July 24, 2007, which
unanimously recommended adoption.
ANALYSIS
Through a public participation process, where several workshops were geographically
dispersed within the City, five major issues were selected from the many issues raised by
staff and residents. At the conclusion of the public workshops, the Planning Board and City
Commission held a joint meeting to hear a presentation and to discuss the input from all of
the previous meetings. This was followed by the Scoping Meeting with State, Regional and
local agencies and municipalities to discuss with them the major issues facing Miami Beach.
CMB EAR Public Meeting Schedule
Date 2004 Location Meetin Sub'ect
March 26 Plannin De t. Ma~or issue in ut from Plannin Staff
March 31 Planning Dept. Major Issue input from City Dept.
Re resentatives
A ril 15 Tem le Menorah, North Beach Ma~or Issue in ut from residents
A ril 16 Nautilus Middle School, Mid Beach Major Issue in ut from residents
April 19 Police Community Room, MBPD
head uarters, South Beach Major Issue input from residents
April 30 CMB City Hall Scoping meeting, major issue input
from a encies
Ma 4 Nautilus Middle School, Mid Beach Major Issue in ut from residents
Ma 10 Normand Shores, North Beach Ma~or Issue in ut from residents
May 12 CMB Commission Chambers Joint City Commission/Planning Board
Ma~or Issues discussion
Based on the input received, five major issues were identified for inclusion in the EAR. On
July 13, 2004, the Department of Community of Community Affairs (DCA) provided a Letter
of Understanding for the review of the Major Issues outlined in the letter. These are as
follows:
Traffic Congestion
Traffic congestion is an increasingly common problem in Miami Beach, as it is across the
county, and indeed the country. Although the City was down-zoned in 1997-1998, there are
several issues that cause traffic congestion, one of which is the popularity of the
entertainment destinations in South Beach. Road construction and the new construction
generated by a heated real estate market has also played a part in the traffic congestion,
including a limited number of convenient connection points between the barrier islands and
the I-95/US 1 corridor.
City Commission Memorandum
Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR)
September 26, 2007 Page 3
Housing
One of the concerns expressed during the citywide public workshops is that there is a lack of
low, moderate and middle-class housing being built, and service workers and white collar
employees are being priced out of the housing market. The latest trend all over South
Florida is for the development of privately-owned properties into high-rise, high-density
condominium structures. This trend unfortunately has had a detrimental impact on the
affordability of moderately-price housing for the workforce. Incentives must be addressed
for the development of housing for service workers and white collar employees -the general
workforce -are desirable in order to accommodate this need.
Pedestrian/Bicycle Amenities
The general perception of residents of the City is that there are insufficient facilities for
pedestrians and bicyclists to navigate throughout the City in a safe or efficient manner, and
that more shaded and protected sidewalks, paths and lanes are necessary.
Although there are many fragments of pleasant bicycle/pedestrian paths and greenways
spread throughout the City, there is no existing system that connects them all into a coherent
system. Some sidewalks are narrow and poles, signs, newspaper boxes, poorly tended
overhanging landscaping and sometimes street trees are obstructions that do not make for a
pleasant walk or bide ride. Strategies to create a citywide plan for a network of bicycle paths
should be reviewed and addressed.
Overdevelopment
Inasmuch as the City carried out a series of amendments to the Land Development
Regulations of the City Code and the Future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Map
down-zoning commercial and multi-family residential areas between 1997-1999, the
perception is still that the City is permitting large development projects to go forward,
exacerbating traffic congestion, and adversely impacting the quality of life of its residents.
The construction of several high rise towers that were in the planning stages and retained
vested rights, between 1989 and 1994, have caused the public to express disapproval of
them.
The City adopted new development regulations for projects that exceed 50,000 gross square
feet (determined by measuring all horizontal levels of usable space, including parking areas
and recreation facilities in open spaces). In addition to this recent amendment to the
development regulations, the City is conducting a Growth Management study that when
completed, may recommend policies that would strengthen current regulations and new
policies that would ensure that development in the City proceeds at a pace that is
manageable.
Incompatible Uses
As the City of Miami Beach is a dense urban community where zoning districts and
permitted, land uses are close to each other with little buffering areas separating them. In
addition, the City's Land Development Regulations permit a mix of uses in the high intensity
residential areas and commercial districts, where although not incompatible, entertainment
uses are a source of localized complaints. The collateral effects of some of the
City Commission Memorandum
Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR)
September 26, 2007 Page 4
entertainment venues, such as trash, public drunkenness and loud crowds filtering into the
residential neighborhoods have been identified as a problem. In addition, residential uses
encroaching into non-residential areas where the likelihood of conflict is magnified with
respect to incompatible uses is another concern.
The perception of incompatible uses is addressed in the report and measures to address the
desires of the residents are also discussed.
The attached Evaluation and Appraisal Report is composed of five chapters and three
appendices. Chapter I describes the five identified major issues with analyses, impacts and
recommendations; Chapter II is an objective achievement analysis of all the Plan elements,
goals, objectives and polices; Chapter III is a community-wide assessment that includes
population changes, vacant land, and location of development in relation to the Plan, as well
as a level of service analysis, coordination of land use and public school planning and
whether the Plan is consistent with changes in Statutes, Administrative rules and regional
plan. Chapter IV includes recommendations to amend the Comprehensive Plan where
necessary, including bringing objectives and policies up to date. Chapter V includes a
summary of the comments from the community meetings; and finally, included in the three
appendices is a map series that shows the future land use, the current land use, existing
public schools in the City, vacant land distribution and existing historic districts among
others.
It should be noted that the recommendations included in the EAR are based only on the
evaluation of existing policies, and additional amendments may be necessary in order to
conform to Section 163.3177, F.S., which requires that each local government
comprehensive plan include at least two planning periods, one covering at least the first 5-
year period occurring after the plan's adoption and one covering at least a 10-year period.
On May 29, 2007, the Administration wrote a Letter to Commission providing preliminary
information on the process for this EAR process and a tentative schedule for its adoption.
PLANNING BOARD
At its July 24, 2007 meeting, the Planning Board by unanimous vote recommended adoption
to the City Commission.
CITY COMMISSION ACTION
At the September 5, 2007 meeting, the City Commission, by a 7-0 voice vote approved on
first reading the resolution and scheduled a second reading and public hearing for the
September 26, 2007 meeting.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission approve the proposed resolution
and adopt the Evaluation and Appraisal Report of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
City Commission Memorandum
Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR)
September 26, 2007 Page 5
The evaluation and appraisal report may be adopted by resolution at a public hearing with
public notice in conformity with the public participation procedures as required by s.
163.3181, which refers to s. 166.041, "Procedures for adoption of ordinances and
resolutions," which requires that the proposed resolution be read by title or in full, on at least
2 separate days and, at least 10 days prior to adoption, be noticed in a newspaper of
general circulation. Although this section of the Statute is silent on the size requirement for
the ad, in an abundance of caution it is suggested that the ad be no less than 2 columns
wide by 10 inches long in a standard size newspaper, and the headline in the advertisement
shall be in a type no smaller than 18 point.
JMG/TH/JGG/ML
Attachments: LTC #122-2007
Evaluation & Appraisal Report of the CMB Comprehensive Plan -Available at the City
Clerk's Office
T:\AGENDA\2007\sep2607 budget\Regular\EAR memo.doc
~. ~ i
MIAMIBEACH
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
ADOPTION OF THE PROPOSED
EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT (EAR)
OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
Ti'~e .City of Miami Beach proposes to adopt the
following resolution:
A ~ .RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY
COfNMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH,
FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE EVALUATION AND
~P!RAISAL REPORT (EAR) OF THE MIAMI BEACH
C~IfPREHENSIVE PLAN AND AUTHORIZING AND
ACTING THE CITY ADMINISTRATION TO
MIT THE REPORT TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA
~;~IiTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND TO ALL
8Tl1ER REQUIRED STATE. AND LOCAL
Ii®YERNMENTAL REVIEW AGENCIES IN
>XRCORDANCE WITH SECTION 163.3191, F.S.
A public hearing on the resolution will be held by the
Illfiami Beach City Commission on Wednesday,
ptember 26, 2007. at 5:00 P.M. or as soon thereafter
possible, in the Commission Chambers located on
#Ite 3'" Floor of City Ha11,1700 Convention Center Drive,
Miami Beach, Florida. This item may be continued and
under those circumstances, additional legal notice.
:wautd:not be provided.
°~r)erested parties are invited to appear at this meeting
;or be represented by an agent, or to express their
vows in writing addressed to the Planning Board c/o
Planning Department, 1700 Convention Center
brlve, 2°° Floor, Miami Beach, Florida 33139.
Pursuant to Florida Stat. 286.0105, the pity hereby
advises ahe public that: if a person decides to appeal
any decision made by this Board- with respect to any
matter considered at its meeting or its hearing, such
person ,must ensure that a verbatim record of the
:proceedings is made, which record includes the
'testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be
based. This notice does not constitute consent by the
City°for the introduction or admission of otherwise
inddmissible or irrelevant evidence, nor does it
authorize challenges or appeals not otherwise allowed
.bylaw.
To request this material in accessible format, sign
language interpreters, information on access for
`persons with disabilities, and/or any accommodation to
:review 'any document or participate in any -city-
sponsored proceeding, please contact (305) 604-2489
(voicej, (305) 673-7218(rfY) five days in advance to
.vitiate .your request. TTY users may also call 711
(Fords Relay Service).
(~ )
F',;
-.,
N
v
~.
m
-~
m
3
m
w
N
;o
0
;~
w
fa